Small sizes have to be used with extra care, so I wouldn't want to make a generic function for all sizes. For bigger sizes we already have nice functions that take care of everything.

The article lays out exactly why you'd want small sizes, even with the risks. The good qualifier just means that it'd have to be no riskier than any other algorithm at the same length.

I agree? That doesn't affect what I said. You shouldn't make a one-size-fits-all function that scales that small. It should have to be a deliberate choice to switch from normal mode to small mode, and anyone that hasn't looked into it deeper shouldn't even know about the small mode.